Bombay High Court
Jindal Cocoa Llp vs Reserve Bank Of India on 15 March, 2023
Author: Neela Gokhale
Bench: G.S. Patel, Neela Gokhale
14-OSWPL-6473-2023.DOC
Gaikwad RD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 6473 OF 2023
Jindal Cocoa LLP & Ors ...Petitioners
Versus
Reserve Bank of India & Ors ...Respondents
Mr Gulnar Mistry, with Saket Mone, Shrey Shah, Aksha Hudda,
Srushti Thorat & Devansh Shah, i/b Hudda & Associates, for the
Petitioners.
Mr Beni Chatterji, with Mohamedali M Chunawala, Navina Kumai,
i/b AA Ansari, for Respondent No.2-UOI.
Mr Gaurav Mehta, with Aamir Ali Shaikh, i/b Dhruve Liladhar &
Co, for Respondent No.4.
CORAM G.S. Patel &
Neela Gokhale, JJ.
DATED: 15th March 2023 PC:-
1. We disposed of a similar matter with the following order a copy of which is at page 261:
"1. The complaint of Mr Seervai for the Petitioners is that the Banking Ombudsman appointed by the Reserve Bank of India has refused to even accept the Petitioners' complaint directed against the HDFC Bank Ltd. The Ombudsman is joined as Respondent No.3 to the Petition. HDFC Bank Ltd is Respondent No.4.Page 1 of 4
15th March 2023 14-OSWPL-6473-2023.DOC
2. Copies of the representations by the Petitioners dated 19th October 2022 and a subsequent follow-up representation of 6th February 2023 are at Exhibit "GG"
collectively and Exhibit "LL" respectively. The representations note previous communications from 8th June 2022 onwards. The relief that the Petitioners seek from the 3rd Respondent Ombudsman is set out inter alia in paragraph 26 of the 19th October 2022 representation.
3. Mr Seervai points out that the only relief sought in this Petition is for a direction to the Ombudsman to consider the Petitioners' representations dated 19th October 2022 and 6th February 2023 and to adjudicate these. Prayer clause (c), which is really the relief sought from the Banking Ombudsman, is not pressed before us in the Writ Petition.
4. Mr Seervai points out from Exhibit "A" to the Petition that the functioning of the Ombudsman is regulated by a self-contained code. This takes the form of an integrated scheme formulated by the Reserve Bank of India and called the Reserve Bank - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme 2021. Clause 8(1) says that the Ombudsman or the Deputy Ombudsman 'shall' consider the complaints of the customers of 'Regulated Entities' relating to deficiency in service. At this stage, this is all that we are concerned with. A 'Regulated Entity' is defined in Clause 3(j) of the Scheme as a bank or a Non-Banking Financial Company or a System Participant or any other entity as the Reserve Bank of India may periodically specify to the extent that it is not excluded under the Scheme.
5. We are not concerned with the merits of the representations. We are of course not directing (and cannot direct) the Ombudsman to decide the Petitioners' representations in a particular manner. We are only concerned that the Ombudsman cannot be seen to Page 2 of 4 15th March 2023 14-OSWPL-6473-2023.DOC somehow defeat the purposes of setting up that office by simply not taking on file, adjudicating and disposing of a complaint by a customer against the Bank.
6. The relief that Mr Seervai seeks admits of an immediate resolution without requiring Affidavits in Reply. In fact, we do not see what reply is possible.
7. Prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the Petition at pages 69 and 70 read thus:
"a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1950, thereby directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the Petitioners Representation dated 19th October 2022 and 6th February 2023 (annexed at Exhibit GG-Colly and Exhibit LL hereto) and pass appropriate order thereafter in a time bound manner;
b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ or Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1950, thereby directing Respondent No.3 to adjudicate the Petitioners complaint dated 8th June 2022 (annexed at Exhibit W hereto)"
8. Accordingly, we issue Rule, dispense with service since all are before us, make it Rule returnable forthwith and proceed to make Rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
9. Our only request to the Ombudsman is to complete the adjudication after affording a hearing and following the procedure under the Scheme in the earliest possible time and preferably within two months from today.
10. The Petition is disposed of in these terms. There will be no order as to costs."
Page 3 of 415th March 2023 14-OSWPL-6473-2023.DOC
2. We make a similar order in the present Petition also, in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) which read thus:
"(a) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1950, thereby directing Respondent No.1 to consider the Petitioners Representation dated 13th October, 2022 and 13th February 2023 and pass appropriate order thereafter in a time bound manner;
(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 1950, thereby directing Respondent No.3 to decide the Petitioners Compliant No. N202223013005014 dated 26th May 2022."
3. The Petition is disposed of in these terms. No order as to costs.
(Neela Gokhale, J) (G. S. Patel, J) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA RAJU GAIKWAD DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date: 2023.03.16 11:33:02 +0530 Page 4 of 4 15th March 2023